HRI Columnists

HRI Selections

HRI Featured Bloggers

Indulto

"Players Up" blogger Indulto is a retired computer programming residing in SoCal and has been betting Thoroughbreds since the days of Kelso, cashing his first ticket at Saratoga while in college.

Indulto is well known in racing's cyber world as a participant on the Ragozin Sheets message board, the PaceAdvantage Forum, Paulick Report, and has made important contributions to the industry's audience as an HRI Readers Blog contributor.

Indulto was active in the formation of the Horseplayers Association of North America and with former HANA colleagues worked on the Players' Boycott of California racing when takeout rates were increased by the legislature there.

Taking his nickname from the King Ranch color-bearer of the 1960s, Indulto now devotes his time to advocate for the recreational player and hobbyist, but prefers lower takeout rates for all rather than subsidized rebates for the few.

Indulto supports the creation of a centralized racing authority to establish uniform rules for racing and wagering and for those standards to be enforced consistently.

Monthly Archives

Syndicate

Tuesday, January 01, 2013

LOS ANGELES, December 31, 2012--Every once in a while I encounter some fresh thinking in cyberspace that yields a "Butch and Sundance" moment: "Who is that guy?"

Apparently others have been asking that question about a blogger who calls himself The Electric Horseman (TEH), and writes a blog called Horse Racing Must Evolve."

Indeed, it was a friend who asked if I were familiar with that individual so I decided to Google his work.

TEH appears to be addressing racetrack management in a series of pieces he has written, all of which contain concepts worth contemplating. In the earliest one, he looked at the way tracks treat their on-track customers as compared with on-line customers:

"When over 20 or 30 years you create a scenario in which invisible customers and their machines sitting at home and online are afforded all of the advantages, and you do almost nothing to correct that giant, industry-wide blunder, you are dooming only yourselves and the industry you are perceived to want to preserve."

"... [Racing] can sure stand to lift more than just a (the?) single finger toward the new and/or novice fans that bother to pay the extra daily costs required to attend the races live. Horse racing, unlike all other sports, continues to maintain an environment where its on-site crowds are put at a decided disadvantage while in direct competition with those who stay home to watch online or on TV!!!"

"At the root of your parimutuel wagering, you are extracting 14-30% of every dollar wagered on your product. Your "whales" and other preferred customers are beating that number steadily over time, and often by a whole lot. This in turn ratchets-up the effective take-out on the newcomers and the novices, who are left dangling, often with no clue about a sport that demands considerable understanding before a person can be competitive. "

So, I was surprised when he wrote the following: "There is exactly nothing wrong with the core parimutuel takeout at most North American racing venues ..."

Subsequently he revealed an anti-professional player agenda with anti-HANA (Horseplayer Association of North America) undertones:

"This isn't about the mutuel takeout, no matter what is constantly trumpeted by those whose lone interests lie in trying to beat the game over the long haul. Those individuals, who have now become a giant liability to horse racing, can't seem to understand that it is their own very existence amid a game otherwise marketed to numbers- and colors-players, which is maintaining a giant wedge between horse racing and the mainstream gambling public."

"Horse racing has perhaps unwittingly tipped the playing field so far toward its high-volume and repeat customers that the dire consequences will eventually clear-out race tracks all together. In what other arena does a business make things so relatively easy for a small segment of its customers that they STAY HOME in order to maximize their relative perks while at the same time the on-site customer suffers a great disadvantage as a direct result?"

Later, he ventured into the realm of horse racing's future: "... With future audiences so accustomed to having so much done for them, it is exactly WRONG to imagine these same audiences wanting to regress 40 years (into O.T.B. environs?) where they should then be expected to go through the laborious task of being left alone to learn all things Horse Racing, practically on their own.

"The scores and scores of minute tasks which fall under the label of "handicapping" will simply need to be effectively done for them (at modern computer speed) in order to draw significant interest from audiences of the future."

There is much more at that blog that merits digesting and debating. You don't have to agree with him to appreciate his attitude and accomplishment. Interestingly as it turns out, the blogger Pull The Pocket shares some of TEH’s concern for newcomers and gently excoriated the SCORE-64 bet we discussed here recently at HRI.

In his piece, The Jackpot Obsession, he wrote, "It's called the "64" where a pick 6 ticket can be taken but it can have no more than 64 combo's for a dollar.

“The hope is that newbies can participate in jackpot bets, because (as we all know) syndicates and big players tend to shoot for large jackpot bets, and crowd out the little guy. Noble I guess, but this fixation on jackpot bets, especially for newbies, really kind of irks me."

In the spirit of to each his own, one of PTP’s "fixations" is betting exchanges: "Betfair is very popular with new players because you can trade (a version of scalping), dutch, and grind out a little scratch with (if you are good) zero takeout."

I wonder how soon newbies become "very good" at exchange betting. Unlike TEH, though, PTP is a huge HANA supporter and is also one of the good guys.

Roger, who occasionally comments at HRI, interestingly proposed a $1 Pick 6 non-carryover wager capped at $64 as an alternative to the $2-minimum carryover Pick Six bet. Reiterating, the “Score-64” wager offers multiple-tier payouts with no carryover along with the lower minimum and greater transparency on how the bet was won; a teachable moment.

What seems to attract the most opposition to this vision is its proposed 64-combination limit per ticket and the minimum cost for each combination.

Perhaps having the number of combinations alive announced to the public after the fourth leg, similar to what is being done at Gulfstream with its Rainbow Pick 6, would provide a hint as to the potential tiered payoffs and help build further interest. This could help churn via the dutching of marginal contenders in the final two legs of the sequence.

The considerable success of the 50-Cent Players Pick Five suggests that the average bettor would be more likely to play this new wager at that level of investment.

A 25-Cent minimum eventually night make it as popular as the Dime Super, a pool that continues to grow while no longer cannibalizing the Trifecta pool to a major degree. Of course, the downside is limiting the prospects of a life-changing score and watering down potential payoffs at the tiered 4-winner and 5-winner levels. Either way, continued dialogue is a good thing.

I read the above commentary slowly, then I read the Electric Horseman’s commentary. Now, at 10:08 I have a headache, having spent over an hour earlier this morning perusing Gulfstream’s past performances.

I’m not sure I fully grasped TEH’s thoughts. I gather that he, like the above commentator, hold to the opinion that the ‘playing field’ is tipped in favor of ‘whales’ and seasoned ‘cappers like myself. I ask why shouldn’t it be? Why should a newbie be considered at a disavantage just because he/she hasn’t hung on the rail, worked a keyboard for days on end, spent hours reading the past performances, or have the bankroll to ‘send it in’.

TEH makes a comment that I would like explained further to me, as I don’t get it: ‘....wherein the next guy bets the same amount of money and still appears to have a much greater chance at a higher rate of return’.

If a group of bettors wager $10,000 into a pick six pool, and I wager $2. I am at a considerable disadvantage, which is as it should be. But, if some bloke happens to pick the six numbers with a $2 wager, he collects a hell of a lot more money thanks to the group who bet the $10,000.

The thread above seems to be that because one has the money and is a seasoned handicapper, that person wins more and the newbie is at a huge disadvantage. The fact that the ‘whale’ is betting more, much more, provides the racebook, OTB, racino, and racetrack with more income; yet the ‘whale’ is castigated for having the ‘balls’ to get involved in the first place.

Ya know, it is not how much you bet, how often you cash tickets; what matters is whether you head home, or to the dinner table, with more money in your pocket than when the day’s racing commenced.

Much is written about how difficult it is for a newbie to understand all the various aspects of handicapping and wagering options; it is as if newbies are overwhelmed - total bulls--t (ever watch the young crowd work a new computer or smart phone?)!

As I have written numerous times here at HRI, the object is to pick winners using handicapping skills, not flood wagering pools with numerous numbers seeks a life changing ‘hit’!

The Score-64, pick five and pick six are ridiculous bets. You-all play ‘em. Me, I like to cash tickets, thus I go no further than the pick three.

In the spirit of bon ami and in recognition of the new year, I must say that I’ve finally read an opinion authored by WMC with which I do not totally disagree.

Keeping bets simple at any level is the proper tack for players who do not approach the game from a professional’s perspective--meaning ONLY that a bettor plays for a living.

In that context, it is where Mr. Corrow and myself disagree. Making straight wagers is not the best use of my limited--albeit not necessarily small-- bankroll.

If one is to make money to live on from time to time, making a score--that term is relative, of course--is not a luxury but a necessaity and, as such, has a higher degree of difficulty but is a risk worth taking, IMNSHO.

wmc,
One of horseplaying’s attractions is that it is a game of skill in which one’s ability to compete is enhanced by experience. The blooming player is more likely to beat himself until he learns the ropes. Indeed the nectar for newbies is cashing tickets. Without such positive feedback early on, newbies usually become non-bettors.

Once one understands that betting favorites is easy, but unprofitable, the challenge begins. Once Beyer ratings became popular, payoffs for contenders who weren’t favorites declined, and one had to leverage one’s selections in the exotic pools. Once takeout became excessive, even the expectations of the experienced declined (unless, of course, they were subsidized by rebates—win or lose).

I played most intensely during the ‘60s and ‘70s and my results were satisfactory because I had a much higher percentage of predictable winners greater than 7-2, and exactas and doubles were vehicles for scores.

Playing more frequently again in retirement, I encountered a different game in the 21st century for which my existing skill set was no longer effective. I do better now identifying a subset to finish in the top 4 than I do isolating the winner. But I wouldn’t have even experimented if not for the dime super.

At a $1 minimum, I don’t think score-64 would get me better results than a $.50 Pick 4. At $.50, I would play it before a $.50 Pick 5. At $.25, I would be more likely to play it play it than a $.50 Pick 4, because of the possibility of hitting 6 of 6 thrown in.

I suspect a lot of newbies would see it the same way and might be encouraged to handicap more races as a result. Just my opinion. What I don’t understand is why you’re so dead set against others giving it a try just because you won’t.

I have not encountered a different game in the 21st century. What has changed? except that now bettors are offered a polyglot of wagering options - most exotic wagers now ostentatiously teasing the bettor with visions of wealth a win away.

Why this sudden need for dime supers, 50-cent pick this or that, $1 pick six or five? Why is it no longer acceptable to win in dribs and drabs?

The trend to exotic wagers has deluted the need to become a skilled handicapper of horse races, just play numbers. What attracted me to gambling on the ponies was the challenge, the reading of the past performances, the need to pick ONE horse to win the race - today, who goes with one plug, except me?

If people who visit a racetrack, OTB, et cetera aren’t interested in using their brain, so be it; if these people can’t differentiate that the Beyer Speed Figures are simply another means of evaluation of a horses potential, and not by any means a guarantee, then so be it - go wager on sport events (BTW, when is the last time that a top BSF in a race won?).

I would like to see racetracks return to the win, place, show wagers, the doubles, and pick threes; and toss the other exotic wagers. Then, perhaps, Thoroughbred racing would draw people interested in 1) making money; 2) developing handicapping skills; and 3) having a great time gambling on something that requires thinking, using one’s brain!

Again, takeout is not and has never been, even remotely, a reason for Thoroughbred’s decline in popularity. The inability of bettors to pick winners is the sole cause; and, accordingly, these same bettors blame takeout for their incompetence and financial losses

So, who is making a living gambling on the ponies?
Who playing slots? Who on sporting events, with the point spread?

As to gambling on the ponies, those who grind it out are surviving (meaning one race at a time, win, exacta, double, pick three). Expecting to survive by chasing the pick four on up is simply wishful thinking.

I would like, if I may, to comment on two subjects: 1) the supposedly professional gambler who is supposedly making a living on wagering on the ponies, and 2) how so-called ‘whales’ are placing me at a disadvantage.

A professional gambler, one who is attempting to make a living on gambling on the ponies, is acutely aware of percentages and odds. Accordingly, a professional gambler on the nags seeks the lowest chance of losing, which means that attempting to win a pick four, pick five, or pick six is not going to lead them to la-la-land.
Successful professional gamblers on the ponies ONLY bet win, doubles, and maybe occasionally a pick three. For Mr. Pricci to suggest that to make a living solely on wagering on the ponies requires one to get involved in pick fours on up is
a ticket to a tin cup on main street.

Much, of late, has been written here at HRI of how so-called ‘whales’ are detrimental to Thoroughbred racing; that they are winning the vast majority of pick six wagers. Fine, let them win, as they are putting the vast majority of money into the pool.
But, what happens when they miss one? Just like the guy who wagers only to show; he does fine, cashing ticket after ticket, race after race, until one plug runs up the track. Then, it will take several more show bets to get back the money lost on that plodder that missed.

Making a ‘score’, as Mr. Pricci writes, is everyone’s dream. A serious gambler knows that to beat this ‘game’ ya gotta grind it out.

No gambler, solely dependent on income from wagering on the ponies, is going to give a second look at any wagering option beyond a pick three.
It’s percentages and odds, not dreams.

Thank you for the intro to the blogger The Elecric Horseman, interesting good stuff! I like these…

“Why even today’s prison inmates have greater access to (and use for) technology than do most of the denizens of the typical O.T.B. location”.

“Racing needs to ask itself whyyyyyyyyyyyyy any such person should want to go to the so often disreputable environs of O.T.B. to hang out with their grandfathers (and the grandfathers of others) when they can practically visit the Galapagos Islands or Madagascar with the touch of a button”.

“with future audiences so accustomed to having so much done for them, it is exactly WRONG to imagine these same audiences wanting to regress 40 years (into O.T.B. environs?) where they should then be expected to go through the laborious task of being left alone to learn all things Horse Racing, practically on their own. To expect that of racing’s targeted audience today is akin to a teacher in 1974 having assigned the task of writing a report on the Ottoman Empire to a child whose family Encyclopedia has only accumulated 3 volumes to date with the “O” chapter not due for delivery for at least 9 more months!! Worse yet, the Horse Racing side of that depends upon the student to VOLUNTEER to be thrust into such a futile situation. (and yes, in both cases, the person in question can go elsewhere… )”

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid? 1970? No smart phones, no computers, just plain old encyclopedias. The beat goes on…

Raindrops keep falling on my head
And just like the guy whose feet are too big for his bed
Nothin’ seems to fit
Those raindrops are falling on my head, they keep falling

So I just did me some talkin’ to the sun
And I said I didn’t like the way he’s got things done
Sleepin’ on the job
Those raindrops are falling on my, head they keep falling

But there’s one thing I know
The blues he sends to meet me won’t defeat me
It won’t be long till happiness steps up to greet me

Raindrops keep falling on my head
But that doesn’t mean my eyes will soon be turnin’ red
Crying’s not for me
Cause I’m never gonna stop the rain by complainin’
Because I’m free
Nothing’s worrying me…

How about a Butch and Sundance guest appearance in an HRI Blog? Call it Corrow and the Cat! We could appear at the New NYRA tracks too ala Harvey Pack and friends. Saratoga would never be the same!

As far as rebates go, everyone(whale or minnow) who wants them should be entitled. Whether you wager at the track, OTB or online a percentage should be given back as comps. No brainer.

Takeout rates should be lowered first for on-track customers only as a reward for making the effort to go to the track. There has to be an advantage of going to the track instead of betting at home. Of course at the track you get to see the horses fitness via paddock scrutiny.

Remember money doesn’t grow on TREES, but is the ROOT of all evil!

The Indulto version perhaps of the beat goes on…

WMC and OTM Al keep falling on Indulto’s head
But that doesn’t mean his eyes will soon be turnin’ red
Crying’s not for he
Cause he’s never gonna stop the rain by complainin’
Because he’s free
Nothing’s worrying hee..

The cri de coeur from the Electric Horseman is that on-site racetrack patrons are at a disadvantage; other than having to perhaps pay for parking and admission I have been thinking now for two days (yea, it hurts) just how can it be?

Golly, aren’t the vast majoriy of people who gamble on sporting events nationwide, far, far away from the live action?

I am still having a difficult time accepting that I might be at a disadvantage in cashing bets, as these eponymous ‘whales’, according to commentary by individuals using pseudonyms here at HRI have suggested.

It doesn’t seem fair that a whale, a few nautical miles south of St. Thomas, V.I., chasing an olive with a toothpick in a longstem cocktail glass as his trophy lathers her legs with SPF-50, can steal a pick four, five, or six using a cell-phone and $10,000 - my $2 wager stands no chance.

But I’ve been scratching, er thinking. These whales can’t be winning them all; otherwise, how does a pick six reach a half-million and upwards? Seems that most of the pick six pots represent previous whale wagers that didn’t bear fruit.
And when a pick pays balloons, it had to have been won by a grandmother using her grandchildren’s birthdays. Ah, I feel better now.

I was a bit depressed early this mornng when I watched the guy in front of me purchase ten Powerball tickets for Wednesday. I purchased only one - am, again, at a disadvantage.

-------

Nice card at Philly today; small fields setting it up nice for a pick-three score with minimal investment.

* Prior commenting issues should now be resolved

Name:

Email:

Location:

Notify me of follow-up comments?

*** HorseRaceInsider will delete any comment that engages in personal attacks directed at anyone, uses foul language, or one made by an imposter using another’s name to express an opinion or comment.

HRI will not, however, edit or discourage those who, with intellectual honesty, disagree with HRI staffers or other readers. We also will not, as is done on some racing sites, edit disagreeable or negative commentary in the interests of commerce.